The Approaching War with Iran: Part
2007 – While the U.S. Congress finishes its vote on a non-binding resolution in opposition to the Bush Administration’s
troop build up in Iraq, war plans for Iran continue.
The Bush Administration
currently denies that it has plans to launch military strikes against Iran. However,
nobody should be fooled by this predictable White House rhetoric. Hollow words
from the shallow and shadowy Bush Administration are its trademark. The fact
is that the same public relations propaganda machine used by the federal government to persuade enough Americans into believing
that the criminal pre-emptive strike on Iraq was legal and justified, has been reprogrammed simply by replacing a “q”
with an “n”. The similarities between the Iraq pre-war propaganda
and the Iran pre-war propaganda are unmistakable.
14, 2007 the Associated Press reported that President Bush is convinced that the Iranian government is supplying deadly weapons
to fighters in Iraq, even if he can’t prove the orders came from the highest levels in Tehran. Nobody should be surprised by the fact that proof, prosecutable evidence, is not important to Bush
/ Cheney. When they lack it, they fabricate it.
This latest Iran supplying Weapons in Iraq psychological manipulation is on par with the Saddam Hussein is
seeking highly enriched uranium from Africa brainwashing the American people took over four years ago. The public should very cautious and highly critical of any current attempts by the corporate media and
the Bush Administration to disseminate a suggested Iran, Iraq, Afghanistan, al-Qaeda, 9/11, Osama bin Laden connection, particularly
since bin Laden has yet to be indicted by the Justice Department for his alleged responsibility for the 9/11 attacks.
Many in Congress,
including presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, have publicly stated that the Bush Administration must first seek congressional
approval before it launches any military strike on Iran. Such political posturing
by Clinton should be recognized as another, in a long string of soon to come, publicity stunts that Clinton and the rest of
the presidential candidates, absent Congressman Ron Paul of Texas who should be the next President of the United States, will be staging between
now and November 2008.
Clinton knows that
S.J. Res. 23, passed on September 14, 2001, authorized the President to “use all necessary and appropriate force against
those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks
that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons…”
have to do with Iran you ask? The whitewash that was the 9/11 Commission ran
by Philip Zelikow has already provided the Bush Whitehouse with enough legal cover to launch an attack against Iran. Zelikow saw to it that the important questions, the questions that the Jersey widows and the rest of America wanted answered by the Commission, the questions that would
have unraveled the lies told about 9/11 and most likely placed this nation in a state of armed revolt against the federal
government – Zelikow made sure these questions never saw the light of day in favor of creating a legal mechanism for
Bush / Cheney to pull the trigger in the greater Middle East – not just Iraq.
Have doubts? In the July 26, 2006 edition of Newsweek ran an article titled 9/11: The Iran Factor - The final report of the 9-11 Commission reveals
troubling new evidence that Tehran was closer to Al Qaeda than Iraq was.
On page 61 of the
9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, the Zelikow Commission
late 1991 or 1992, discussions in Sudan between al Qaeda and Iranian operatives led to an informal agreement to cooperate
in providing support – even if only training – for actions carried out primarily against Israel and the United
On page 128 the
intelligence gave no clear indication of what might be afoot, some intelligence reports mentioned chemical weapons, pointing
toward work at a camp in southern Afghanistan called Derunta. On November 4,
1998, the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York unsealed its indictment of Bin Laden, charging
him with conspiracy to attack U.S. defense installations. The indictment also
charged that al Qaeda had allied itself with Sudan, Iran, and Hezbollah.
S.J. Res. 23 authorized the President to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or
persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11,
2001, or harbored such organizations or persons. The Congress loaded the gun
and granted the license and the 9/11 Commission provided the bullets to Bush / Cheney to now hunt in Iran without further
congressional oversight. Despite what Clinton or any other member of Congress
has to say about it, until S.J. Res. 23 is revoked, the license to invade Iran remains legally in Bush / Cheney possession.
Yes, the Bush
Administration did seek and obtained another joint resolution authorizing its invasion of Iraq, but it was not required. S.J. Res. 23 already provided the legal cover for an invasion or Iraq. The Iraq War resolution was about politics, not about the law. Remember,
in October 2002, public opinion and maintaining a strong republican majority in the U.S. Congress still had value to Bush
/ Cheney. That is the only reason they sought the Iraq war resolution. Today, what the public thinks about either of them is of no obvious concern to Bush
or Cheney. Consequently, Bush / Cheney are more dangerous now than at any other
time. They have reached the point where they have absolutely nothing to lose,
so they will do exactly what they want unless they are terminated – and it appears that the Congress remains despicably
unwilling to end the Presidency and Vice-Presidency of Bush and Cheney through impeachment.
This will prove to be the greatest mistake of the 110th Congress.
are three efforts sitting in committee on Capitol Hill that aim to thwart a Bush / Cheney invasion of Iran. H.J. Res. 14 states:
provision of law enacted before the date of the enactment of this joint resolution shall be construed to authorize the use
of military force by the United States against Iran. Absent a national emergency
created by attack by Iran, or a demonstrably imminent attack by Iran, upon the United States, its territories or possessions
or its armed forces, the President shall consult with Congress, and receive specific authorization pursuant to law from Congress,
prior to initiating any use of military force against Iran.
Clearly, H.J. Res.
14, when interpreted by Attorney General Alberto “No Habeas Corpus” Gonzales allows the President to simply say
after attacking Iran that he believed Iranian attack against U.S. possessions and armed forces was imminent. In fact, as mentioned earlier, Bush has already decided that Iran is supplying deadly weapons to fighters
in Iraq, thus constituting an attack on U.S. troops in Iraq. H.R. 770 offers
the same language as H.J. Res. 14 and therefore the same trapdoor for Bush / Cheney to slither though on their way out of
the Whitehouse in January 2009.
H. Con. Res. 33
is more aggressive. It is relying on Article I, Section 8 of the United States
Constitution. If ever we the people would truly return to Article I, Section
8, history would later describe our moment as America’s 2nd Revolution.
The problem with this resolution is that it states:
Congress rejects any suggestion that Public Law 107-40 (S.J. Res. 23), the authorization of force resolution approved in response
to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, explicitly or implicitly, extends to authorizing military action against Iran,
including over its nuclear program.
DeFazio, Holt, Payne, Rothman, Cummings, Farr, Woolsey, Doggett, Lee, Conyers, Stark, Kucinich, Corrine Brown of Florida,
Ms. McCollum of Minnesota, Hooley, McGovern, Thompson of California, Blumenauer, Capuano, and Murtha are all too smart to
not know that Public Law 107-40 does indeed extend to authorizing military action against Iran simply by Bush / Cheney pulling
off the bookshelf, their copy of the 9/11 Commission Report and turning to page 61 and 128.
If H. Con. Res.
33 passed, it still wouldn’t serve as a “legal” obstacle to prevent Bush / Cheney from attacking Iran if
that is their plan. Rest assured, Gonzales has already advised the Whitehouse
according. After the fact, the argument would be whether Public Law 107-40 did
or did not authorize military action against Iran, which is does because the 9/11 Commission has already made the Iran - 9/11
connection. The problem with this is that Bush / Cheney could rely
on the 9/11 Commission Report to provide legal cover to invade Iran when much of the public – nearly half the American
population - now understands that the 9/11 Commission Report has too many omissions to be considered credible enough to be
accepted by the public as the final report on 9/11 – let alone to launch another war in the Middle East.
Bush / Cheney have proven that they have little or no respect for public opinion, it is unlikely that an invasion of Iran
would be launched without establishing or fabricating a more current pretext for war.
Neither is suicidal. They’re homicidal.
On February 1, 2007
former National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski testified before the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee. He said:
the United States continues to be bogged down in a protracted bloody involvement in Iraq, the final destination on this
downhill track is likely to be a head-on conflict with Iran and with much of the world of Islam at large. A plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran involves Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks;
then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a “defense” U.S.
military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across
Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
What did Brzezinski
mean by a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran? He clearly was suggesting
a false flag operation – a fabricated terror attack in the United States that would be blamed on Iran and serve as the
catalyst to harden public support for Bush / Cheney and their imperialistic new world order vision, just like 9/11 did.
obvious concern regarding what Brzezinski suggested to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee two weeks ago, it also must
be considered how it is that a former National Security Advisor could fathom even the remote possibility that elements of
the U.S. government could perpetrate or be complicit in a false-flag terrorist attack to sell a war in Iran.
make Brzezinski even consider such a possibility? Brzezinski considers the possibility
because he knows the reality – that elements of the U.S. intelligence community in conjunction with foreign intelligence
communities are capable of allowing a terrorist attack to happen so that it can be exploited, exasperating an act of terrorism
for greater effect, or to actually engage in terrorism themselves.
There is little
doubt remaining in the minds of the majority of Americans that the invasion of Iraq had little or nothing to do with what
the Bush Administration claimed was the justification. The Muckraker Report is
certain that the invasion had much more to do with protecting the U.S. dollar and gain a financial stake in Iraqi oil fields. The U.S. dollar objective was achieved
soon after Baghdad fell to U.S. forces. However, the production sharing agreements
that Cheney promised to oil executives seeking access to Iraqi oil fields have proven to be more difficult.
What the corporate
media in the United States fails to consistently report is that much of the violence in Iraq is related to Iraqis resisting
“their” government’s efforts to sign production sharing agreements with companies like Exxon Mobil and ConocoPhillips. In this regard, the U.S. military will be in Iraq, in some capacity, for decades. First, to eventually break the Iraqi people until they submit to these highly sought
after production sharing agreements, sometimes called production service agreements, and second, to then protect the oil interests
of companies like Exxon Mobil, Chevron Corporation, ConocoPhillips, Shell Oil, and BP America.
The other reason
the U.S. invaded Iraq is Israel and the Israel Lobby in Washington DC. There
is no shortage of articles on this subject to be found on the Internet. However,
one element of the Israel promoting the Iraq War story never gained the media coverage it deserved, and it involves
the executive director of the 9/11 Commission Philip Zelikow. Appearing
at the University of Virginia of September 10, 2002, Zelikow said:
would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I’ll tell
you what I think the real threat is and actually has been since 1990 – it’s the threat to Israel. And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don’t care deeply about
that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn’t
want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell.
11, 2001 was a popular sell though, was it not? Remember, a plausible scenario
for a military collision with Iran involves Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks; then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist
act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a “defense” U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely
America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan.
Israel is on record,
over and over and over again claiming that Iran is a grave threat to the Zionist State and therefore the United States. Article after article after article can be found that reports Israeli officials stating
that if the United States does not stop Iran’s nuclear weapons program, Israel will.
Interestingly, there remains no evidence whatsoever that Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons – only nuclear energy. The fact that nuclear-armed Israel is hysterical about it is not the United States’
problem. The question that needs to be asked now is the same as what Zelikow
asked about Iraq in 2002. Why would Iran attack America or use nuclear weapons
against us if they had them? The truth is that Iran would not. What then remains can only be to once again protect the value of the U.S. dollar from Iran’s effort to rid itself of the U.S. dollar, gain control of Iranian oil fields, and pacify Israel’s unfounded fears.
For more information
on the Israel Lobby and how it is attempting to push U.S. troops in Iran please read “Israel Lobby” driving force behind any future military strikes
The time for being
patient has expired. It’s time for the irate public to get a little medieval
on our public servants, lobbyists, and bankers – least they forget to whom this country belongs. It is our blood that they are spilling for imperialistic political purposes. It is our wealth that they continue to plunder. It’s
no time to “make nice” or to be concerned with “political correctness” or be afraid of being labeled
“anti-Semitic”. It’s time to kick some ruling elite - power
broker ass! Somebody is going to end up bloody and broke - us or them. You decide.